[kenrexford]

An interesting bridge problem has been recurring to me, and I am curious as to anyone's thoughts on this...

Suppose a simple major raise auction. 1♥-P-2♥ or 1♠-P-2♠.

If Opener holds four of the other major, a few possible concerns may arise. Similar concerns may also arise when opener has 5-4 with a minor.

Concern #1: The 4-4 fit may offer a superior strain for game.
Concern #2: The 4-4 fit may offer the only strain for a slam.
Concern #3: The 4-4 fit may actually be a 5-4 fit, with very little needed for a slam.

These concerns are further complicated by the reality that focusing the new suit is difficult, for a few reasons.

Reason #1: Responder might not be good enough to raise the new suit and force game.
Reason #2: Even if he can, it is difficult to distinguish 5-card support from 4-card support.
Reason #3: Even if a mechanism for distinguishing 5-card from 4-card support exists, most courses take up potentially critical space.

The "solution" I had originally thought of was a Serious 3NT response, with a potential "flier" raise to game in the new suit as a gamble. This Serious 3NT solution does allow a 4♣ asking bid, refocusing the strain. However, there is insufficient space to work out controls and the length of the new fit. It also is unsatisfactory in suggesting a new strain without committing to game.

Thus, perhaps a new style works and solves all problems, namely that Opener bids one-under his natural/unbalanced game try, with one-under the already-agreed suit being a quantitative game "bash." (After 1♥-P-2♥, 2♠-P-2NT solves the spade raise issue.)

Suppose, then, 1♠-P-2♠-P-3♦(hearts, GT or ST). If Responder holds four or five hearts, he can bid 3♥ on any hand. If Opener suggests a sign-off at 3♠, Responder might continue to 4♥ with extras. Sure, passing 3♥ might be right, but stopping on a dime at 3♥ on game-try hands seems less important than allowing Responder to bid 3♥ more flexibly.

Opener might opt to raise to four of the new major.

If opener is slammish, in the new major, HE can bid 3NT, which allows the same responses to the 4♣ asking bid after the old 3NT, except that Responder bids 4♣ with the old 4♥ response to 4♣, or 4♥ with the "I had support but nothing else" hand.

This solves the problem of being able to raise without forcing game. What about the five-card support issue? With that hand, you use Serious 3NT, or a flier with junk. Or, with a truly terrible hand, but five-card support, treat it as four.

I believe this solves the entirety of issues.

Any thoughts???

[mike777]

I am not sure I understand the problem? You bid the other major and partner raises you with 4 yes?

[awm]

There is some advantage if you don't necessarily want to be in game opposite a fit. For example, suppose the auction starts 1♠-2♠. A game try in hearts could be a four-card suit but it doesn't have to be. What does partner do with four small hearts opposite this? Keep in mind that there are a number of possibilities:

(1) 3♥ might've been a game try on Hxx or the like. In this case four small hearts is an awful holding, and you probably want to play 3♠.
(2) 3♥ might've been a four-card suit game try, on something like HHxx. In this case four small hearts may not be enough to make game, but the 4-4 heart fit could easily be superior to spades. You probably want to play 3♥.
(3) 3♥ might've been looking for an alternate strain with four or even five good hearts. In this case you probably want to play 4♥.

So if the auction goes 1♠-2♠-3♥, partner can't cater to all three hand types. But if the auction goes 1♠-2♠-3♦, with the 3♦ call showing a heart game try, partner can bid:

(1) 3♥ with four small hearts and a reject. This can be corrected to 3♠ with the first hand or passed with the second or raised to 4♥ with the third.

(2) 3♠ with fewer than four hearts and a reject.

(3) 4♥ with four hearts and an accept, to offer choice of games.

(4) 4♠ with Hxx of hearts and an accept.

(5) Cuebid with five hearts and an accept, possibly finding a light slam if partner is 5-5 in the majors.

Other than having to remember it, I don't see a major loss to this method. Perhaps it's more likely opener's LHO can double the try, but of course he will be on lead and competing this late in a game-try auction is probably rare.

[kenrexford]

For those who cannot understand the problem, which is rather amazing, consider a plausible hand for Opener (from last night):

AKxxx-AQ10x-A-xxx

If partner holds Jxx-Jxxxx-xx-KJx (the actual holding), this is terrible. However, being able to show heart support might get us to a probably-superior 4♥.

Change Responder to Qxx-Kxxxx-xx-Ax, and 7♥ is a fair contract.

Reduce the hand slightly to Qxx-Kxxx-xx-Ax, and 6♥ may well make.

Change the reduction to Qxx-Kxxx-Kx-xx, and the five-level may be in jeopardy.

Work all of this out after 1♠-P-2♠-P-3♥-P-4♥.

[mikestar]

I've got to wonder whether the slam hands are frequent enough to worry about, especially if this involves using a method that helps the defense (imagine what good opponents could do with the double of 3♦ vs the negative inference of not doubling).

There is a simpler method that caters well to the 4-4 game in the other major as well as concealing info from the opponents rather well. From Marshal Miles Modern Constructive Bidding:

After 1♠-2♠, three of a new suit is natural and forcing, usually the second suit is five cards or a good four. 3♠ is in theory a game try asking for good trumps, but may be a 1-2-3 stop with good enough trumps that responder can't have good trumps. 2NT is the general game try. Responder can bid 3♠ or 4♠. On a doubtful hand, responder bids the cheapest suit in which he would reject a short-suit game try.

Notice how well this conceals opener's hand. After 1♠-2♠-2NT-3♦-4♠, Opener might have a hand where: (a) he needed help in diamonds and got it, ( he wanted to be in game opposite any non-minimum, or © He was exploring slam with short diamonds and gave up when responder shows waste. Sometimes blind leads are for players who can hear quite well.

1♥-2♥ auctions are similar: 2♠ is the general try and 2NT shows spades.

[Echognome]

I think the main point here is that the vast majority of the time you are going to be interested in finding game and not slam. I'm not saying that slam is impossible after 1M-2M, but that it is rare. As you mention, there are some holdings where the cards fit just right and slam is there. However, by using your one-under game tries, you have to give up on something else. Here, it seems that something else is either going to be 2NT or one above the trump suit. This is not without cost! Either you are going to be missing out on a choice of games OR a different type of trial bid (say help suit or short suit), you are losing accuracy on your game bidding, in exchange for accuracy on your slam bidding. Since slams are much rarer, this price seems too high for my tastes.

[awm]

People seem to be missing the point here. If you're using Miles' game try style, you can still play that 1♠-2♠:

2NT = asking bid
3♣ = four good diamonds, or five diamonds
3♦ = four good hearts, or five hearts
3♥ = four good clubs, or five clubs
3♠ = ask for good trumps, or 1-2-3 stop

All you've done is move around the "natural" game tries. All the other bids are uneffected. So you're not really giving opponents "more information" in any meaningful sense. The advantages of this scheme:

(1) Responder can distinguish between a bad hand with fit and a good hand with fit (by accepting or super-accepting the transfer). This helps on the (admittedly rare) slam hands.
(2) We can potentially play three of the side suit when it's right (normally the natural game try is forcing).
(3) Sometimes we enable a choice of "who declares" which could be the key to finding an extra trick, since if we happen to discover a double fit responder will be declarer in the second suit.

The disadvantages:

(1) Opponents can double the artificial bid. But the guy who can double is the opponent who will be on opening lead. This greatly reduces the usefulness of a "lead directing double." A "find the sacrifice" double is still potentially possible, but a lot less common.

(2) You lose some space for possible counter-tries, for example you could play that after 1♠-2♠-3♣ (natural) you have a counter-try of 3♦ showing diamond cards. You can't do this in the transfer scheme because the sequence will go 1♠-2♠-3♥ (clubs) and the space is gone. There's no compensating extra space for this because we still can't show a club-counter-try after 1♠-2♠-3♣(diamonds). Then again, if you're using a scheme where 2NT was asking to begin with, you're probably not that interested in counter-tries (most 5431-ish hands for example would tend to start with 2NT anyway).

[keylime]

I've started using Ambra-style game tries recently.

Basically after 1M-2M, the next bid up is asking where a help suit game try would be accepted in. Responder bids a suit which they have honor strength or rebids 3M with an absolute minimum. Otherwise rebids by opener are singleton showing with 1M-2M-3M being trump quality asks.

1H-2H-2S:

2Nt - accepting if it is in spades
3C - accepts in clubs, but not in spades
3D - accepts in diamonds, but not in spades or clubs
3NT - choice of game.

1S-2S-2NT:

3C - accepts if it's clubs
3D - accepts in diamonds, not in clubs
3H - accepts in hearts, but not in either minor
3NT - choice of game.